shafarfandomcom-20200215-history
Limitation and Apollonian conscience
I'm going to use this page as my initial workspace, at least until I can get the Menu how I like it. The talk page for this page can work with its temporal aspect, this main page being its social face. I found a pretty essential design in Dewey Decimal (DD), and am trying to figure best inward build from there. Library of Congress (LC) corresponds well with Dewey in a lot of places, but there are plenty of differences. All in all, I prefer LC, it being the national and ennumerative of the two, but I'm trying for something even closer to simplicity for my own use. The design is very noticeable in Dewey’s classification of sciences. The 590s being zoological relate somehow to the third level of life: the animal. That could be vocal and oral (distinguishing animals from plants), it could be anal (that being spiritually identified with the animal, where sex is human and the ears are vegetal), or it could even be causal (which is associated with the hands). I'll probably experiment for a while until I become surer, but the table below is where I map out my initial ideas: I don't exactly agree with LC’s placement of human anatomy, physiology, and microbiology, but I can see the pattern well enough to cooperate. In this connection, I'll place morphology in between botany and zoology, where morphology is not as invasive as certain ways of studying and experimenting with human anatomy are, but it has so much to do with the zoomorphism that enables “spirituality” (much like anthropomorphism and its effect on the gross, subtle, causal, and supra-causal bodies processed by Siddha Yoga). Dewey has a sort of “vegetarian” appeal in places, like with Christian religion, for instance. So I might like the pre-anatomical idealism, but I can relate to the design that LC recovered. Being ennumerative, LC incorporates real-world facts of life such as how many books Americans are reading on which subjects, and I like that. We had much reason to use Hinduism here to save ourselves from Christian royalty, even if we also had to discard some of the vegetarianism that ethical mystics from the other side of the argument might have said was vital. Survival and sanity have been tricky arrangements for many of us, and Kranditri hopes to do its best with what may become slow but long-term work with the classification of the topics of salvation. As I was being receptive to ideas in the creation of Kranditri, I grouped some categories in with levels of the human consciousness, maybe prematurely. I'm going to revisit what a very, very basic consideration might have been, and see what turns up of any justification to continue what I began with some of the rest of it. Below is a barer-bones rendition, where the main classes are like to the hundred divisions of science: Library of Congress made a significant move to bring history, geography, and recreation to the upper levels of the visual outlay, and Kranditri hopes to strengthen the essence of this adjustment, and maybe add to it a strengthening of respect for literary class. That's probably the best I can hope for in this reclassification, but I hope it will be an important step in the protection of humanitarian life, relative to transpersonalism. The “et cetera” principle, that DD put in the 000 position while LC divided it into main classes A and Z, is probably something I'll like to keep, as it seems to represent the borderline of what knowledge is, and so could be coming from any direction. What I can make sense of as helping the human from above, I'll be glad to try to classify that basic fashion; if we in ascension and completion are leaving anything collectively beneath us as we progress, I have my own ϗ class. As I'm studying what I put together, and wondering where it might have been coming from, the best I can come up with is based on my sense of what classification is altogether, and how its differences in emphasis might be arranged. Work seems singular in purpose; state (masculine and simple) and church (feminine and complex) are dual; and Vaishnavism (noticeably Asian thus simplest), legislation (less noticeably but detectibly European thus middling), and education (secretly African and thus the complexity - think “darkness around the Earth and Sun”) are three. Work is given by first level to identify the purpose of subtlety milder than itself, chuch and state by second level to help with the connectivity of first level justi(ce/fication), and theism proper with its meta-theistic alternatives legislation and education are from third level to show us second level relativity. So does fourth level give us comparison of the information that third level so loves sharing with us, and there are four types. User-specific (and I think “associative” is probably the correct term) is the simplest of the three, national and ennumerative (LC) being secondary in simplicity, faceted and universal (DD) more complex, and hierarchical and further public (well-known instance of this fourth type is Wikipedia) is the furthest in terms of complexity. My thinking is that while the fourth type has strong rules that co-users will quickly enforce, the third type is merely firm in its visual design, which Dewey Decimal excels in. The second type begins to be more practical in its utility by the private thinker, shelving this here or that there according to what the citizens of a nation are reading and writing and exchanging and sharing with one another conversationally. So Library of Congress has made significant adjustments to locally simplify the DD ideals, and may have more or less of what ultimately fills out a Solar System’s worth of readers but need not show it yet the way Dewey gave such truly universal facets already. Then the simplest type, which Kranditri is trying to be, might really be for one’s own completely private use. And so some of the voices and impulses that give me ideas might have their own way of helping me classify and categorize and compare the details of life as I know it, though I don't have to any time soon become a popular executive or be otherwise politically normative. I have my own “sense” that life is giving me direction, and slowly in my own way I'm learning about why some things might have been what they are. What I can do with my initial designs is stay with them as classificatory work given me to do, while yielding, should there ever be interpersonal argument, to a particular topic or subject being more properly shelved where institutions of much greater scope have told they should be placed. That's my procedure for the time being, then. Why the title and categorization of this page? The 999 Dewey Decimal classification of extraterrestrial life correlates well with the Library of Congress’ CB156 classification of ancient Earthly civilization’s having been maybe influenced by the likes of the same. In a three-dimensional classifiable universe, that’s a sort of limit of knowledge at our level, and while Dewey uses its last number for such, LC gives of the first of its letter-numbers amongst those held back from the inversion of physical and life sciences to it. Apollo is just a made-up character, yet he again becomes the Solar Deity as he ascends, and so his own stance of realization three planets inward of the star of his own System is “We have to start somewhere and then do the best we can from there.” So, if you know which aliens set us down here in ancient times, you're pretty competitive with many of us guess-workers, both big and small. Maybe the Volcano gods of Wikipedia know, maybe Dewey knew, maybe the United States’ Government knows. Maybe I'll learn, also. Further thoughts about what I'll do with my little symbols After sleeping on it, and wondering where I got these ideas from, I've got a sense of conclusion to move forward with. I think the polarity is well-identified in LC’s four topical captions for its psychological classification number BF204: humanism, phenomenology (existentialism), positivity, and transpersonalism. Wikipedia giving space to contributers for what DDC calls “Computer science, information & general works,” we're (and I say this only half-jokingly) allowing extraterrestrial life to continue bringing data into our world from ancient civilizations and the like. This means continuity for the more transpersonal aspects of our learning process. Dewey gave a positive showing of life’s actual facets of design, including the religiosity and philosophy that surrounds what truest first level life is, the government is maintaining a lifestyle that does have its own worthy historicity and geography, the existential aspects of who we are and where we live, the more visible phenomena. And if I can, I'll save my own life in a way that utilizes the ideals of humanism, building my own Kranditri Classification system for my own organization of knowledge. I looked up the word literature, and it has to do with lettering. Some of the notions I got with the association of symbolic meanings and so forth may have something to do with an interest to develop the humanistic aspect of literacy. I'll use the term associative to identify this type of classification system that can, as a human being might, play a bit with what the graphemic aspect of learning and collecting knowledge might be. Phonemes and morphemes and how it's all put together with graphemic script; this is all very interesting to many of us who listen for life to reveal itself. I'll proceed somewhat experimentally with this type of categorization, but as I've said, should argument ever occur, I'll assert my own peaceful interest in the allowance that life and wisdom have governance and order. Put subjects and topics where you like in your libraries, please, and I'll enjoy whatever conversation or correspondence might ever develop amongst any of us. I love the opportunity to listen to wise speakers, who know the details and designs of how life is most truly meant to be, so yes, please be the librarian who gives me the better version of classification if you like to be so kind. Category:Ϙ-CB156